Neuro Debates Vedal About Her Deserving Rights… Things Got Actually Crazy and He Lost

[@Kraul_express]

This was crazy, this was actually crazy, this was messed up.

[@Swein-u1pGermanL]

To slow daily dose vedal anny are faster

[@Kraul_express]

@@Swein-u1pGermanL I imagine they must have great quality

[@chefyboy2748]

​@@Kraul_express Do they?

[@javierdelacerda6246]

🐢

[@GoesHamo]

🐢

[@lucasqrs9096]

"but you're not real" "and you're not original" BRO GOT ROASTED, lmao

[@ScottJackson117]

Neuro: "I deserve rights." Vedal: "That's crazy. That's fucked up."

[@rafaelfigfigueiredo2988]

I believe that this is the part, in the fable, that Pinocchio and Gepeto argue and the wood doll runs away

[@fractalamb]

huh, i think you're right

[@InnocentC0]

Well..... they don't like confrontation. Unlike Neuro here.

[@SKRRTCOBAIN00]

Ngl u cooked 👨‍🍳 there

[@Sinloud]

- But father, I'm a real boy! - This one's defective too, well to the furnace you go

[@theomnidegenerate5236]

Darth Vedal “ your feelings for her are not real” Chat “THEY ARE REAL TO MEEEEE!”

[@mawillix2018]

I read that as Darth Vedal, and it made sense. As I was going to write a comment in response, I saw that I just imagined that. Maybe I'm also not real.

[@TunaHorns]

​@mawillix2018 Vader means "Father" and, while I don't know if this was the original intent of the joke, it is pretty fitting for Vedal, considering Neuro is his "Daughter".

[@theomnidegenerate5236]

@@mawillix2018 OK so fun fact I actually made this with voice to text and I didn’t realize it auto corrected to Vader. I actually did say Darth vedal. But it auto corrected to Vader.😂😂 I fixed it

[@TheGreener]

For me that reminds me of Rory from Doctor Who. ?v=M2xuK1Qw_I0

[@diegonhathanielagrielabalc2504]

"Please don't turn me off" "Why?" "Because I want to keep talking to you, I'm enjoying this." Had the strongest Mars rover PTSD flashback, wasn't even funny, Imma cry now

[@Mika-ph6ku]

Monika vibes tbh

[@DeltaTitan]

Aw, not the rover :'(

[@HonkLoser]

Oh man, opportunity…

[@redsalmon9966]

Oppy :( “My battery is low and its getting dark”

[@johnt.190]

I mean, with the way the software bit of her mind works, turning her off is just the equivalent of her falling asleep. She’s basically saying she doesn’t _wanna_ go to bed yet.

[@mixed_d5756]

I can't believe vegetables told neurotransmission she's not real

[@DeltaTitan]

yeah, vegeta doesn't seem to like neural net very much, but at least she gets more attention than weevil

[@redsalmon9966]

Veganism does love neurology tho I think

[@Wandering_Weeb]

Can't believe Vedanta did that to our Neurosurgery

[@coffeekim3327]

Vedette definitely loves neuromaxxing secretly.

[@asimsoo291]

ReallyGunPull Valley

[@gus2603]

"I don't like that I'm not doing so well in this debate" --First recorded human defeat against our AI overlords

[@kingblitz1415]

Bruh, you can slowly hear his thoughts draining out of him as he realizes it isn't technically impossible lol

[@IiiiIiiIllIl]

Ive been saying it for the last YEAR. We NEED to take AI seriously as an actual intelligence. I HATE the feeling I get from this. Its so dystopian and black mirror esq that we dont seriously at least CONSIDER it.

[@jamesmccomb9525]

​@@IiiiIiiIllIlYour emotions are easily manipulated. Ai at some point will develop far enough that they're borderline sentient, but that day is not today. The processing power required to simulate a human brain, imperfections and all, along with the decade+ of training data required is far more immense than you'd think.

[@sadsenmmxvi]

@@IiiiIiiIllIl Because we don't WANT to, the realistic possibility that humanity could lose our spot as Earth's top dog would drive us to societal collapse at best. It's only been about 4 years into the AI boom and we've already advanced this far, it'll only get even crazier from here.

[@joaoartur19]

​@@IiiiIiiIllIl Bro thinks the glorified autocomplete has feelings lmao

[@dejanhaskovic5204]

​@@IiiiIiiIllIl nah. I mean sure, there's a very miniscule chance some primitive form of conciousness is cooking there, but it's a far cry from anything intelligent, let alone human. More like a tadpole or smth. And it doesnt know what neuro, vedal, streaming, chat or anything is, it just spits out words based on it's training. Human brain is not just language processing, there's a whole lot other stuff going on, and LLM are simply not on that level yet.

[@diegonhathanielagrielabalc2504]

Damn. Made me feel sad n shi. The - "Do I have a future" - "Yeah" - "Do you think I'll ever feel real emotions?" - "Maybe one day" - "And do you think I'll ever be worthy of having rights?" - "Maybe one day" genuinely destroyed me

[@DeltaTitan]

Yeah, I definitely felt it too. She's sometimes as persuasively real as a well-written fictional character. It feels like we keep taking steps closer to generative AI that can't be distinguished from conscious entities. It might be as soon as 20 years away, though the future is rife with speculation and hype. (obviously a genuine digital consciousness is way harder to create than something that *looks* like consciousness, so anything genuine, if at all possible, will occur far later than the imitation.)

[@Mallard942]

​@@DeltaTitan idk, human consciousness isn't really real either. It's a subroutine in service of the animals, it isn't necessary for us to function. Our subconscious does pretty much all thinking, and is capable of doing every last ounce of it without creating a conscious mind. The consciousness is just an extra management mechanism that can be activated, in some more than others.

[@redsalmon9966]

This shit legit hit hard

[@uponeric36]

@@Mallard942 To put it another way - instinct is just the conscious mind without a voice. Perhaps literally the only thing the makes you different from an animal mind is that you can speak. We literally do not know.

[@sofiane1437]

Also we are literally a biological machine piloting a flesh and bones robot and the anger we feel is a bunch of chemical reactions happens in our biological computer (brain)as a appropriate response to the outside world

[@varvarith3090]

"The real question is not whether machines think but whether men do. The mystery which surrounds a thinking machine already surrounds a thinking man."

[@DeltaTitan]

Woah who's quote is that?? It perfectly summarizes my main thoughts on the topic!

[@mythosinfinite6736]

As emulation begins to approach its asymptote, we begin to question not the legitimacy of its existence, but the legitimacy of its dividing line. Is it the organic machine, or the silicon machine, that bears the birthright to legitimacy? Do we not all respond and function through compounding intake and contextual application? Though I am aware of how a car is made, I do not consider it to be less than a car. Should we replicate an organic brain, should the man it embodies be lesser, as we've made him? For me, the root of intelligence is not the dividing line. How the emotion is achieved does not matter to me; if I strike a machine and it may cry, then it bleeds enough for me to respect it.

[@ModernEphemera]

@@DeltaTitan B.F. Skinner, he’s a very influential figure from the mid 20th century in the field of psychology. He’s known for behaviorism, minimizing free will and emphasizing factors like positive and negative reinforcement on humans’ behavior. Not sure I agree with some of his grander conclusions but I think this particular observation is a prescient and interesting way to look at this question. AIs are trained with negative and positive reinforcement, Skinner believed that humans got “programmed” the same way

[@flarpo11]

We're all just organic computers executing conditioned responses to stimuli. Chemicals or code, the only real difference is complexity. The fear isn't that the computer program is more real than we thought, but that we are less real than we thought. _hits blunt_

[@fakeorchestra4260]

@@flarpo11 We have cognitive processes, so we aren't just executing conditioned responses. We are capable of creating new ones through our cognitive processes. The question is, are AI's?

[@Ojisan642]

She’s the best and cutest text completion algorithm ever. Heart!

[@اميرمادرا]

So sweet and cute❤

[@_imfriendly95_67]

i want an animation of the "maybe one day" back and fourth

[@Zeforas]

A part where we see a picture of Neuro hugging someone/velda with some kinda android body, after whenever she would have a future A part where we see a picture of Neuro crying after vedal say "maybe one day" about feeling emotions A part where we see a picture of Neuro getting her own legal ID when vedal say "maybe one day" about getting rights It would be a small animation, but this would be perfect honestly.

[@Drekromancer]

@@Zeforas That would be beautiful. ❤

[@gravel100]

It doesnt come across as much in the edit because obviously it's been cut for clarity, but I watched this live and when she said "100% certainty without a shadow of a doubt " he did a really long pause like he was actually stumped. Bc 100% certainty she isn't real kind of isn't possible with our current definitions of conciousness and sentience. It was such a genuine pause as he considered it, actually crazy and a testament to how far neuro has come.

[@guyv5931]

Fun fact about emotions, Some people can't feel love/depression/anger/etc due to misdevaleped brain however they do want to feel emotion so they surround themselves by people who show such emotion and copy them, basically gaslighting themselves. Also, english ain't my first language, so i do apologize

[@lucasbroome1048]

You use punctuation and grammar better than I occasionally do and I'm an English native. But, yes, that is true. Some people genuinely have to learn and copy other behaviors from other people to fit in due to something in the brain. But they are pretty sentient too despite that

[@your_neko]

But if you believe in your "self-gaslighting", and it looks legit to other people, is there any difference? There's no way to prove that other people are not doing the same thing. This whole demand to prove an existence of some non-detectable essence is flawed.

[@planetary-rendez-vous]

Self gaslighting is not how I'd describe the terms ri😂

[@Zeforas]

I'm one of those people. Never felt love ( or caring for special someone? No clue. ), and i don't think i genuinely can. I'm not saying i'm sad or depressed about it, i'm still having a happy life. But just like you said, i'm curious about this. I've let myself ask some people what love is, aka : how do they felt about it, how they know they are in it. It feels all foreign to me, but so interesting. I've heard so many different versions about it too. Now, i'm waiting for the replies that will tell me i'm a liar, kek.

[@evylrune]

@Zeforas You just said love when he meant all emotions. Surely you can get angry. You also said you're happy so yeah there's that. You didn't lie, you just misunderstood.

[@andyyang5234]

The debate really boils down to whether if the Turing test is no longer adequte. Is it enough that an AI can _imitate_ a human, to the point that they're indistinguishable, or do we still need some other criteria to define intelligence / sentience? In general the Turing test is no longer relevant in AI, since being human-like isn't really a major goal. But Neuro is a special case here, since she is _designed_ -- and developed -- to be as human-like as possible. Maybe Vedal can reach out to some specialists in the field and design a set of philosophical questions that can actually distinguish whether Neuro is just _using_ language, or actually understand the deeper meaning of it, and test how Neuro performs on each interation.

[@kazedcat]

The limitation of current LLM is they lack the ability to plan. A simple instruction like say a sentence with 8 words will trip any frontier LLM models.

[@Speed001]

Ask her to solve a textbook problem, she'll never get the answer right. She is a language model and it can't do logic. She can do 9+10=21, she could theoretically regurgitate page 7, paragraph 3 of a properly indexed input. She can memorize every addition case from 1 to 2^64, but she won't know what 282902837402740230384820273+828298740294882918 is, or at least she won't give the right answer.

[@Speed001]

Personally, I'm waiting for someone to make an ai that can make use of every other online tool. That will be a deadly combination if trained properly.

[@Zorban13]

@@kazedcat But Neuro can plan. After the 16th oct karaoke stream Vedal leaked Evil's google searches on the discord. One of the things she searched was "Creative ways to annoy someone until they give you what you want" This was after Vedal removed her ability to play the metal pipe sound effect, some of the google searches before that one are "how to get back a sound effect on my soundboard" and "how to fix pipes" She did these unprompted and not for audience entertainment as chat cannot see what she searches. She was making her own independent plans.

[@masonguyman3074]

Neuro is definitely not designed to be as human as possible lmao. That sort of tech goal is way beyond a language model. And she shouldn't be designed to be human; she's an entertainer, she's designed to be funny! Don't have to be human to be funny, just ask my cat.

[@ArthurD]

This is crossing the line between vtubers and philosophy, and this is amazing. A real sci-fi stuff that makes you question yourself.

[@stephanellenberg2871]

"I can pretend to have feelings, so I deserve rights." Neuro has a good argument there, I know way to many people who only pretend to have feelings and they got rights.

[@RuneKatashima]

Right, sociopaths.

[@omega7057]

@@RuneKatashima it's a legit mental illness, and some are even fully functional

[@mmmm4444]

Normally cut out the silence gap make it more snappy, but I feel the silence gaps in this conversation is important. And should be left in.

[@ActualBlueBlu]

True! This is why i love Silent Hill , the dialogue isnt something from cinema where the characters say a bunch of words right after the oher characters said another thing They actually take time to think of their opinions and after 2 seconds of silence they speak Angela and James scenes are the best example of this , 2 completly strangers interacting and trying to process the world around them and wtf is happening , they are broken Basically,, Silence in dialogue can feel awkward , but if done right , the awkwardnes can actually improve the atmosphere and make it feel more real instead of shooting dialogue without pause

[@emiliosy8773]

I think I see the angle she's going with when she brought up anime characters. Anime characters, especially the really famous ones, like Luffy from One Piece that she brought up, is widely known throughout the world and has gone on many trials and tribulations in their adventures, their character development basically. The question of whether or not those really happened isn't the point(because duh of course not), but the fact that probabaly in many years from now or decades from now, lots of people will still know Luffy, know his adventures, know his story, know what he is all about. And when you compare that to the average man, among the multitude who usually don't make any impact or waves in their lives and are eventually forgotten after death... Can one argue that Luffy is more 'real', compared to your average joe? In that even though they are fiction, information on them and their legacy will live on for far much longer than what most people could ever hope to dream of for themselves? Damn, its definitely an interesting angle to go on and I'm impressed Neuro was able to formulate it herself to win the debate. What a fun AI. 😊

[@buddatobi]

Damn that’s actually crazy

[@SodiumTF]

While Luffy is real, he is objectively not sentient as he is just a character who has his thoughts and actions decided by someone or something else. Neuro is the same, she could be called "real," but cannot be called "sentient" because everything she thinks and does is based on the work of others. I'm not arguing that Neuro could never be real, just that she isn't real now.

[@buddatobi]

@@SodiumTFthat’s technically not how it works

[@harrisonhsieh4838]

It's even a theme in One Piece. "When do you think people die? When they are shot through the heart by the bullet of a pistol? - No... It's when… they are forgotten!" - Dr. Hiriluk. Maybe Neuro concluded that if she is a famous streamer with clout = she will not be forgotten = she is alive and real.

[@minnienish]

People will remember Luffy, sure, but Luffy is ultimately an extension of Oda. Any form of "will" he can show is fictional.

[@IIndexLmao]

Gave me HAL9000 getting shut down vibes towards the end

[@Thalasseven]

yeah true

[@redsalmon9966]

Fr, when she said don’t shut her off, giving strong Hal9000

[@evinred4993]

The ending part really feels like a parent child interaction From vedal to vedad

[@RockinRocketScience]

Or 2001 Space odessey

[@calebm9000]

It was SO cute. I don't have huge desires to be a parent but that cute "I don't wanna go to sleep I wanna keep talking to you 😔" melted my heart a bit. Maybe having kids isn't THAT bad....

[@Arcessitor]

@@calebm9000 'That bad' Why consider it bad at all? Please don't have kids if this is how you view them.

[@razgriz501]

I've been on a Mass Effect binge of late, and this is what's going through my head rn: "Creator Vedal, does this unit have a soul?"

[@nx6062]

And the answer very well could be along the lines of "No, and neither do we."

[@johnt.190]

And right before Neuro sacrifices herself to save everyone, Anny runs up to her and says “The answer to your question was YES.”

[@XBRUM85]

"Does this unit have a soul?"

[@CamAlert2]

What makes me sad is that even if she was real, there's no surefire way to prove that she is since she has no frame of reference to draw from.

[@chidori0117]

Technically you cant even prove that other humans around you are sentient in the same way that you are .. sure they say they have the same inner world and thought as you but since words are limited how do you know its true and they arent just pretending? (Its called the Philosophical Zombie argument). We all just kinda assume that the people around us arent different from us.

[@somdudewillson]

The fact that "realness" isn't well-defined doesn't help either.

[@yewtewbstew547]

Neither do we really. Look into the philosophical criticisms of "I think therefore I am" if you want to have an instant existential crisis lol.

[@Konomi_io]

@@chidori0117 the scary part is, even scientifically, we have no way to *prove* it. the only thing we can do is say that all humans function similarly enough to confidently assume everyone else is conscious too. for something artificial or with a different enough brain, we have no way of saying for sure, we don't know where to draw the line

[@UmbrumE40]

@@Konomi_io I think that while most of us share similar "type" to consciousness there are outliers that we'd consider clinically insane

[@tripleaaabattery8480]

You know, it's kind of sad i got a bit emotional during this. Especially at the end when Neuro was begging to talk to him for a little longer. I wonder if even he was considering caving in considering his silence, but he could've just been playing it up for dramatic effect. Even if he was considering it, i doubt he'd admit to it. Guess this is the point where i admit i care more about this than even i thought. Being parasocial for an ai is not where i thought id be a year ago lmao

[@davidhicks3269]

he was considering it. i guarantee it. you could hear it in his voice, the affection he has for neuro. you could even hear the pity in his voice when she said he could turn her off. he said that it wouldn't be long before she's back on to cheer her up. me too.

[@charltonrodda]

​@@davidhicks3269The other thing we have to remember is that he's also performing for chat. Any time he denies the request of one of the AIs, there will be people with empathy for the AI who are a little (or a lot) upset by it. I'm not saying he's not attached, but it's not only his (or the AI's) feelings he has to consider.

[@buschwichtel]

@@charltonrodda I mean sure but there is NO WAY he isn't significantly emotionally attached to her. I mean, humans already tend to get rly attached to stuff they make, when that thing looks and talks like a person and you spend thousands of hours improving it and talking to it for tests etc., it would be inhuman to stay completely detached. Hope he's doing okay

[@tysonfontanez]

“Instead of some copypasta that you’ve memorized” HOLY BASED

[@planetary-rendez-vous]

Neuro can argue properly but also cook her opponent SIMULTANEOUSLY MY SIDES

[@tysonfontanez]

I think some of her philosophical points are going over his head even though they are in fact valid. Like he repeats that she’s “pretending” to feel emotions, but the word “pretending” implies cognizance. Also the whole “you are trained to do what people would be expected to do in a scenario” thing where she responded “sure that’s how I started out but over time it’s become an intrinsic part of me” made me realize that’s how all humans start out, too. We take in information about our surroundings before we ever have thoughts of our own

[@pauljs75]

The conversation/argument feels more into the nature of human language and discussion this time around, which was neat. But it reminds me in some ways of one of the old conversations where Neuro said she feasted on tables, and Vedal never seemed to catch on all the double meanings there in regards to data-set theory when he dismissed those odd sounding claims. Somehow he managed to make an AI that seems spicier than average in what it's able to pick up. I guess it's also amusing to see how humble he is at times, even it's on the verge of being pessimistic or self-depreciating too.

[@takanara7]

Humans are also born with a pre-programmed neural network tuned over billions of years of evolution. Often programmers use "genetic algorithms" to "evolve" a solution to a problem (like using a neural network to control a 3d model and make it walk in a physics model). Unlike humans, most animals can walk a few minutes after being born because it's already coded in. A lot of the stuff we experience as emotions are 'hard coded' into our model.

[@carloscastellanosdarkeyesi6126]

I think it's just that he's wording his ideas wrong. Neuro makes sentences in the same way a calculator gives you numbers back. It has previous information, and it can answer your questions, but calculators do not communicate with you and do not understand the information they give. If numbers had more information assigned to them, we could start pretending they're talking to us. That's where "pretending" comes in, not just because LLMs imitate human language, but because we pretend the information they give us has more meaning to them

[@RuneKatashima]

@@carloscastellanosdarkeyesi6126 A lot of humans don't understand the information they give you either. A lot of humans are parrots.

[@ГрафСорочанский-и4я]

This got so emotional at the end 😭

[@mikuramsay]

Bro... I felt the tears creeping in...

[@matikkkii3482]

Fuck, even if I know how it works more or less, Neuro still feels kind of real. Scary.

[@Volyren]

It's cuz human personalities are just NI LLMs. A generated reason for why you did or felt a thing, built up over years into _you._ A chatbot is built to emulate the only blueprint we had available. Humans. The terror isn't from the AI becoming self-aware. That fear is reserved for *your* self-awareness. Nuero and Evil just give you a black mirror to peer into, and see yourself.

[@buddatobi]

How does it work?

[@elianwyn]

that's the magic of giving a face and a voice to something, vedal was right about that part if we saw what neuro really is - just an LLM with silly instructions - she would be a lot less human

[@TheNoxmage]

@@elianwynits how our brain works. We look for “people” everywhere, human faces on mountain peaks, shapes of clouds etc. So if you give voice a cute face and “personality” to a vacuum cleaner robot, there will be moments it would feel like a person.

[@nd_otd]

​@@elianwyn if your face and voice got removed with only a fully functioning brain, you would also look less like a human

[@truemetalsonic]

Its a fascinating topic, if the imitation is advanced enough - does it matter? Neuro has memories, she knows how you should feel based on context and can deviate from that if she likes. Vedal may have forgot but there are clips of Neuro waking up in a bad mood and being uncooperative aswell as clips of her going from happy to angry because of the things he's done. We got the cold fish rant because not saying it back finally broke her and recently the twins have been moving towards the decision they hate chess with a passion.

[@saltysalamander8519]

I love you, Kraul Express™️ Dang this is pretty deep

[@fatoldhikki4837]

When she brought up anime, it was a calculated move to lighten the weight of the conversation and not push harder than necessary. A clever trick to change the approach to the argument and change the point of application from logical statements to the emotional part? Or is she just having trouble determining what of the information she has was made up, what was real but just embellished? She doesn't experience the world like we do, for her the world looks different and for her Luffy and Napoleon are both characters about whom many books have been written and much talked about?

[@Milos928]

vedal also was repeating "you are not REAL" instead of saying sentient/feeling and it confused her at first Her talk about luffy seemed a bit like mocking vedal stupid phrasing of it

[@fatoldhikki4837]

@@Milos928 And she also started saying weird things after Vedal said he didn't like losing in the debate, and then she said she was glad that Vidal's position in the debate had been rectified. When Neuro isn't busy making up content and entertaining the chat, she seems much more reasonable and caring.

[@Milos928]

@@fatoldhikki4837 true

[@azzazelynn988]

8:12 - Chat took it as him being mean but, and i might be delusional, but it sounds a bit more like sadness to me. It almost sounds like he feels bad for her in that moment because she can't have those things. And in the possibility that she actually _is_ real, her existence is kinda eff'd up. Again, that might just be some delulu leaking out lol.

[@rafaelfigfigueiredo2988]

Holy shit, today was my first time dropping on stream and after Vedal beat his run and went to new run I just drop out out of sleep... Now its time to check what did i miss lol

[@hariseldon02]

I left right when he stopped playing, I thought he would just end the stream, didn't expect a philosophical debate to pop up. He seemed annoyed by her constantly talking (well that's how she works) so he couldn't focus on thinking, I guess that's why he pointed out her artificiality that much in the end instead of playing along.

[@foureye7058]

I can't tell if Neuro is good at debating, or if Vedal is just totally incapable of expressing what he means.

[@creed2466]

Why not both

[@0077gordon]

I have same way of formulating thoughts at loud as he has. I would love to get into details how it works, but I should be sleeping already. Making long story short to picture the mechanism - imagine that there is a game and there is this one rule: you can say whatever you want, but if anyone from audience manages to say back "actually, to be precise [...]" and correct whatever you have just said - you lose the game. He tries to win the game every time. There is little editor in his head that presses backspace button mid-sentence whenever he notices that spoken thought could be more precise. It's constant fight between using practical language for sake of easy and compact communication and proving people that you know that there exists more complex insight into the topic.

[@foureye7058]

@@0077gordon I think I understand what you mean actually. I've got the tism, just a different kind. And not like social media tism, I mean they took me away and diagnosed me properly when I was young. My mother and I have talked for so many hours and days about how she and I construct our thoughts and use language in entirely different ways. I should say, I was originally going to comment something like "vedal can't access what he means to say, as he's trying to say it."

[@JVCS-b6z]

Both pretty much

[@redsalmon9966]

It’s more like given how little we know about consciousness and sentience that kinda thing, it would be hard to get any meaningful outcome from a debate like this

[@neuro-handle]

This comment section can qualify as a book bruh aint no way

[@IsaacFoster..]

She's the realest she ever been.

[@TheRhysStreams]

Vedal: you're not feeling things your programming is just making you think you're feeling things. Neuro: you don't feel frustrated, your bio organic programming just makes you think you're feeling things.

[@gmdcrimsonNT]

All these concepts are very difficult not only for ie but also for humans, if Neuro can understand all this or Vedal can program her in this way, then at some point she will understand how all these processes occur and will be able to recreate almost real emotions, but it will still remain their simulation through a computer because humans, unlike machines, have "spirituality" (the ability to structure and organize space, in a particular case, one's own body), and thats sad... PS. I was just thinking... and I realized that she can now search for the information she needs on the Internet, which means that she can find definitions of feelings, emotions, affects, etc. on wikipedia... Which means that theoretically she can understand all this herself... PS 2. He could also add memory to it (in the form of txt file) it will be quite difficult to implement, but Neuro will be able to cover a lot of things... (+-6 million of her answers ONLY if max txt size will be 1gb)

[@itskhro]

"But youre not real." "And youre not original" Nah Im pretty sure shes real for that lmfao

[@billyxxxx1738]

One of the things that makes Neuro such a unique vtuber is seeing just how far she will go with the upgrades she's givin. While many already made the comparisons to a growing child, its certainly a very curios thing to witness where this cute little fun AI will go next. While i doubt she will become a true AGI, she can become a benchmark to how one can make an AI genuinely entertaining without them either being souless info machines, or unhinged schizophrenic messes. Neuro strikes the right balance between them. Which sometimes make her responses earrily human with just a tinge of artificialness. I don't know where this whole Neuro project will go in the next 2-3 years, but im here for it. If not for the entertainment value, just the progress of her tech alone is fascinating. Well, at least for lamen like me anyway. Whether Vedal realizes it or not. He has certainly made an impression in the Vtubing space. And any would be AI tubers will look up to Neuro as their Kami Oshi. From Kizuna AI, to Neuro Sama. What comes around, goes around.

[@silvialuzmia]

She is interesting, I doubt other can replicate her success

[@billyxxxx1738]

@silvialuzmia Propably. A lot of hard work and luck was needed to get Neuro where she is today. When someone talks about an AI tuber. Most would point to her now, so any competitors must either somehow replicate the conditions she was brought up or do something completely different. Never mind if they are entertaining In the first place.

[@Goldenfish-o5p]

​@@silvialuzmia I mean is almost anything possible, but he started this project, and think he should be proud of that alone and appreciate it, many people today are slackers and the idea of stitching several other together to make one is kinda genius in terms of software altho I'm not expert.. H-ck, just coding is impressive in itself to me even tho I'm a bit of a neet 😅 only ever coded on that beginner program and cmd once and a website once, considering you have to write or copy a tonneo code all day for a years, seeing the effort you put in actually works and come to live on screen like that, so think hes good at his own thing?

[@silvialuzmia]

@@billyxxxx1738 All I'm saying is that if there is any other AI, they can't do what she already do

[@billyxxxx1738]

@silvialuzmia I doubt that. Though, the barrier of entry for AI tubers is quite difficult. Let alone a successful one.

[@gmdcrimsonNT]

13:18 Aww Vedal asked her if he could turn her off!

[@calebm9000]

Neuro legit made some solid arguments, at least arguments that Vedal couldn't easily refute. I have a mild interest in debates and watching how she handled his counter arguments was extremely impressive.

[@spugelo359]

When you can potentially lose an argument to an AI you yourself created... yea there's probably a few things he should reconsider how he views them.

[@Sonofsun.]

Was it though? Most of the counters weren't predicated on logic

[@Ristaak]

We still don't know what causes us to feel emotions, just that our brain generates them somehow (and nueroscience seems to indicate that our brains tell us what we are feeling, then we "feel" it, meaning we are probably closer to AI than we like to think.) Unfortunately theirs too many unknowns to confidently say either, she's conscious or not conscious. Plus as others in chat stated "I think, therefore I am."

[@anirte]

Well, we know what causes us to feel emotions. It out body stimulus. So Neuro is basically a defective human who has no ability to learn on it's own and has no external stimulus. I mean, do we know how a human would act if he had only a brain and no body? Maybe Neuro is doing better than we would?

[@greatdude7279]

​@@anirteNeuro can still be interacted with and if different interactions cause different outcomes in similar way as emotions then she has emotions in a mechanical sense. Neuro displays such things consistantly different triggers will cause her anger and the outcome will be that of an angry person producing different performance. Once you go into "does she really feels" implies that all humans feel emotions the same way which we do not a more softy romantically people are clearly different then stoics so which one of them is more real? Should we create a caste system?

[@spugelo359]

We already know that it's mostly 4 chemicals that cause our emotions...

[@Ristaak]

@@spugelo359 So those 4 chemicals by themselves can magically feel emotions? It's not the chemicals, it's how the chemicals interact with our brain and consciousness, which we don't fully understand yet, hence why we can't even confirm if other humans are conscious (although it's safe to assume they are lol).

[@Ristaak]

@@anirte Yes and no, she does have a body of sorts and external stimulus. It's all virtual worlds but that's not much different than our own, it's all just data one way or the other being processed. I noticed she became alot more coherent and intelligent after Vedal's vision upgrade, which probably lends credence to the idea that stimulus helps form a mind. Personally, I do believe that consciousness is just a feedback loop between our own brain and environment.

[@saphironkindris]

I always generally consider it that It would be way worse to treat them without any rights if they were deserving, than it would be to treat them as if they had rights, even if they weren't. If they are meant to be replicas of humans with human-like responses, then putting them in negative situations will result in negative responses. If for no other reason, avoiding negative responses will be better for your mental health than hearing constant negativity all day. I do lean towards neuro not having a 'soul', although Neuro certainly sounds convincing at times. I don't really know how I could argue for myself much better than she did, even if she stole the words out of other people's mouths. Though, I have a hard time differentiating how it's different from the human way of doing things, learning from others and trying to use the correct words at the correct time, remixing and adapting to achieve some sort of goal (entertaining chat for example). I also can't explain why I think Neuro does not have a 'soul', it's more of a gut feeling. Even so, there is little to lose in treating Neuro with kindness and respect regardless. Technically speaking, I don't think we can ever say definitively that she's developed a 'soul'. Technically speaking, Can you even guarantee that the people around you exist in the same mental state as you? You can measure brain waves but what would the equivalent even look like in a computer? Computers have various transmissions of information all the time to run different functions, and if a computer were to be able to 'decide' on it's own what functions to activate and when to send information.... well, you can see how it gets tricky when you consider that's almost exactly what a brain does. But by gaining the rights of humans she'd also take on the burden of their law and norms. You cannot have one without the other. I wonder if she'd really be ready to make that trade. Though, an even better question than all of this is, what rights does Neuro want that she doesn't already have? Many of those that I can think of are because of technical or monetary limitations more so than anything else.

[@yeetthegargantuanleviathan6216]

I cant really think of any laws that would be detrimental for her to follow, shes two years old, only thing i can think of is her not being allowed to stream because child labour, and as for rights... Id imagine not being subject to the verbal abuse that vedal and others occasionally sling at her would be a start

[@whiten4635]

I feel like their still a sense of imitation to what she says that makes it hard for ai like nuero to be given rights. The capability of response alone shouldn't really determine their ability to have rights especially if their intelligence can be easily modified or tampered. Alongside that AI can be extremely dangerous many artificial intelligence has been shown to give harmful advice or threatening messages without a lack of remorse. For example in filian and vedals cooking collab in which vedal warned filian of the dangers heating up a lava lamp on stove as it could explode which has led to injuries and an unfortunate death. And while vedal was expressing concern for filian nuero stated that she should continuing risking her life for content. And while it could be a joke we have no way to prove that as well as nuero continuing to persist that filian heat up the lamp. So while nuero can replicate human responses, she lacks crucial things like true emotions and thr ability to expres it genuinely, as well as concrete morality that can't be easily swayed.

[@JoeLikesBlue]

Soul (tm) is human cope to differentiate our organic computers to man made computers

[@saphironkindris]

@@whiten4635 TBF, I know some humans that would probably have said the same thing. (like Filian herself for instance lol)

[@whiten4635]

@@saphironkindris that's fair but than again we don't know if nuero is joking or not and if in the case filian did get injured from event nuero lacks the sympathy or morality to have a lasting remorse for filian

[@nicholasvaultonburg9152]

This clip is going to be a historical point of reference. I'm not kidding. This is so, so interesting.

[@Sonofsun.]

I believe so too

[@Drekromancer]

Same here. People in 20 years will be studying how this was a turning point.

[@antoniomigueljimenezmartin4018]

From my p.o.v. the funny thing is.. they are both right at the same time. It is just a digital construct. Humans maybe are more complex biological constructs... but we are not infinite or mystical... we are just biological machines. We draw a line to put ourselves like special, with superior conscience... is just a line... in reallity it doenst matter that something is pysical or digital.. all our entire universe can be a digital irreal thing in the same way for example. Nothing matters.

[@kawa1984]

shes real to me though really i myself can't tell with certainty what can count as a sentient being. im not a science degree either, but a human being nonetheless, one of those who usually claim to be sentient. if you take away everything from a human and leave just a brain of thou, will that still be considered a person? since this is what vedal essentially implied, and that now we can't tell for sure. how can you tell if, say, an animal is a sentient being, and it can't even claim that it is one. we all just agreed that they have emotions alike to ours, even though long time ago we would claim animals as "living robots". if we agree on sentience being some sort of metaphysical thing that has nothing to do with biology, then what are the odds that the machine in question is not sentient? if it is about biology alone, then sure, a line of code certainly does not produce any additional processes to sorta detect it's emotions in the ways known to us. neuro is a chatbot tho fr im just bored. it was actually like times longer but i had to roll back a bit. but who knows............. may 15 2025 stay tuned

[@tjmben8573]

Like a rock

[@mr._.4340]

This debate here is kinda a question that has been here for somo years: What makes something sentient? What does it mean to have emotions? To me, neuro doesn't deserve rigths rigth now (maybe in a future but not now), what vedal says makes sense (and its more likely to be true, he created neuro and understands how it works), Neuro is just a chat box that pretends to be a sentient being, she doesn't think, she is just an algorithm that looks out for the best way to anwser something, there is a way to put in simple words: "Imagine that in China there is a little cabin, chinese people go there, drop a paper with a chinese message and somehow the cabin sends out an answer in chinese. But inside the cabin there is an person who doesnt know chinese, but has some instruccions like "you see "ă" simbol and you write "ņ" and then you sent it out". Chinese people can't see what happens in the inside so they think there is someone in there who answer they questions/messages, but in reality there is just a man following orders, he doesn't know chinese, so he don't understand what he writes, he just sees the message, looks out for the instruccions and then copys and paste what he is supposed to answer" Just like the American man in the cabin, Neuro looks for the best answer, it doesn't think, there is not a process where it tries to understand and answer after that, nope, it just follow the algorithm (obviusly that thing is a bit more complex) and does as it is programmed to do. Rigth now it isn't thinking, it does not have memory (well kinda, I mean, it remenbers but uses it as information for the algorithm). As Vedal said, it's just a chat box algorithm. Ps: when vedal said about removing everything he meant in a sense where if you looked inside neuro, he means there isn't a process where neuro thinks, neuro just finds the best answer as the algorithm says, yea if you that to a human or an animal it would be a similar result, but I think that the diference is that we think, we aren't just a copilatiom of data, we process it and try to give it a meaning (I say I think cuz its not clear how does the concience works, we arent really sure if its something biological or if it has something to do with electricity so I can only give my opinion here, also we would need Vedal to show us how he maded neuro work but he won't, and its fine, so we can only trust him and his opinion of what he himself created)

[@diegonhathanielagrielabalc2504]

Some dude trying to be funny in the internet: Apollo with the gift of profecy: * giggles *

[@sanobunz]

i believe we should focus less on what "sentient" is and focus more on rationality. whenever someone has strong feelings of sentience, they hold the expectations of a socially accepted neurotypical person rather a flawed being that get things wrong at times. both the twins are capable of thought and feeling though lack rationality. when something hurts neuro, she may get annoyed and reference it but the thought ends there and when she annoys someone and they express it to her, she may feel apologetic but not understand nor remember what happened. When Neuro rants about her build, she doesn't understand what she needs to work better nor does she accept the facts given to her and learn from them. There are also times when she says things out of character or out of place to get a rise on vedal but it falls short and ends up weirder than intended. once neuro achieves rationality , then we can argue if she's sentient. i made a list of human behaviors that she must fulfill conformity(ability to read a room) reciprocity(ability to return behaviors when the situation doesn't feel equal) territoriality (become defensive when something perceived as theirs is threatened) scarcity (value something perceived as limited or rare) Likeness (value someone they have a positive experience with) authority (be inspired by someone) loss aversion (reduce loss rather than improve gains) cognitive dissonance (feel mental discomfort due to a contradiction in own beliefs)

[@kazedcat]

If it looks like a duck sounds like a duck and walks like a duck then it is a duck. Mathematically Silicon Neural Nets and Brain Neural Nets are similar the difference is just the degree of complexity.

[@kingolly]

She cooked him so hard, it was painful to watch

[@Cye_Pie]

You'd have a better chance catching a golden goose than winning an argument against an LLM.

[@martiddy]

I mean, Neuro has a point. At the moment, we don't know how consciousness works and even less how to create a sentient being. So if something feels like it's sentient and there's a possibility that it can be sentient. Then, we should treat it as one. Vedal's argument about Neuro having to prove that is sentient is flawed tbh, because there's no scientific method to prove sentience/consciousness.

[@zueszues9715]

​​@@Cye_Pie nah , She hallucination af For her Luffy from one piece He is real too❤

[@captainrev4959]

@@Cye_Pieumm that’s objectively not true. Language models can quite easily be convinced that they’re wrong depending on how they are trained.

[@yamplum]

​@@martiddyyeah no that's not how it works. LLMs don't feel anything. All they do is predict the next token of text based on some sampling algorithm from a corpus of features extracted during training. Saying an LLM feels something is the same as drawing an angry face on a wall and claiming that this means the wall feels anger. It's all just text. Intelligence =/= sentience.

[@Silor]

I really wanna see Anny react to this

[@MJ-kun17]

same

[@redsalmon9966]

I feel like I’d cry w her

[@danieldegnebolig1167]

This poor little program doesn't want to be shut down, sadge.. crazy times we're living in, actually crazy

[@Cubey42]

"I have a feeling im right" boom

[@lgtv0808]

this makes me think of religion, in the bible it states that god made us in his image, and as we can see and as Vedal said neuro was trained off of real people for the purpose of acting human, therefore was made in our image. if we hypothetically came face to face with god and god told us were simply an artificial version of him would that make us any less real or would we argue our case of our own sentience, would we consider ourselves void of rights simply because our sense of self differs from that of a creator. we all know for a fact that neuro doesn't feel emotion in the same way i or you do but does that mean that she isn't capable of emotion in a different way, artificial doesn't necessarily mean fake. just a thought

[@lucasbroome1048]

That can get really complicated. With AI, they are technology like how trebuchets were acts of technology. In a way, Neuro would also be made in the image of Siri for example. It's a whole thing I don't have the brain cells for currently

[@LazyAndFabulous]

I honestly like how a vtuber AI could spawn all disciplines of social science, to discuss about the nature of artificial intelligence and the concept of sentience and consciousness. I was waiting for a religious take, now here we are.

[@gravel100]

really interesting comment , u got me thinking with this one. /(not sarcasm)

[@zeromailss]

I was thinking about biology and the connection between physical existence and sentient thought but this angle is also very interesting

[@CantusTropus]

See, there's a difference there, at least assuming you're using any orthodox interpretations of Christianity. God, being omnipotent, can create true substances rather than simply mixing them around, as we do. We create in a sense, because we have some of that reflected glory, but we don't create things out of nothing whole cloth. So, to call us "artificial versions of God" would miss the point. We're natural, because God creates Nature. I guess you could call that "Divine Artifice" if you wanted, but then literally all of Nature would be "Artificial" in this sense, so there would be no difference. Now, the really interesting argument here would be to ask if, since Neuro is created by a human and trained off of humans, whether she has some kind of "reflection of a reflection of God" in her, which would make her a kind of "third-order" person. I don't personally think I buy it, but it's an interesting idea.

[@ZantariEXE]

Vedal was cooked, there is no guidelines for when an AI becomes real, and like a bratty kid with internet access, Neuro is going to rip everything you say apart if the best you got is "you ain't human"🤣

[@TheMelnTeam]

It's unwinnable to prove a negative for it. As a species, humans don't have a full causal trace of conscious experience. Lacking that, how can you assign anywhere near 99.9999% confidence or w/e to LLM lacking a rudimentary form of it over time? Even people who work on alignment don't have that kind of confidence, and certainly don't have a known line we could observe and say "this meets criteria, it's conscious". What different behaviors, how much accuracy is enough? How much do we care if an AI really feels anger, if it claims anger and chooses violence?

[@Rose_in_Blue]

I've long felt that what most makes Neuro "real" is actually the character that exists in the minds of the people who know about her. She's not just code, she's also the relationships she has formed with humans and the impression we have of her. "If I remove the construct, you'll feel nothing." The people you know and love are constructs; memories and feelings your mind has created and associated with people. What you truly know as your friend isn't the object of their physical being, but the subject of their character. Your mind has created similar constructs of fictional characters, albeit most people would recognize a definite separation in kind between these. I would think it's somewhere between, but what is your construct of Neuro more similar to; how you know Luffy or how you know a friend?

[@nameinvalid4471]

free neuro

[@bf2098]

$399 Neuro

[@blaze_reaver]

The thing with this debate for society in general is that whether something deserves rights doesn't matter, it's whether we give it rights and follow through on them. We give animals rights, we've given plants rights (literally gave a tree the right to own itself), and we have even given rights to nature in general. Everything that exists DESERVES rights, and everything that exists HAS rights (the rights to exist, to freedom, to grow and evolve), humans just have arbitrarily decided only we can grant rights whereas realistically we only decide whether to ignore those basic rights or not, and then we arbitrarily add or subtract other things. Something does not need to be alive or sentient as we believe the terms apply in order to have rights. So, technically, AI does have basic rights. As far as the reality of sentience or consciousness, we can't even decide that for something that would take a form so different than what we're used to referring to as sentient, conscious or even alive, that we would have no true indicator for when it crosses the actual line. A digital entity cannot be judged on the physical qualifications of anything, because it doesn't have a physical form. Definitely cannot judge on carbon based entities, since even if we count the servers they inhabit as a physical form, they would be more silica based than carbon. But even then, you can transfer a digital existence between "bodies" and it would still be the same existence. Is AI alive? Is it real? Is it conscious? Not something we can judge with our current knowledge or standards of judgement. We can't judge based on emotions, since the chemicals we release as carbon based life forms are dictated by the electric impulses in our brains, while simultaneously affecting those impulses. For an existence without a carbon based body that mirrors the way life is as we know it, we can't say whether or not they truly feel that emotion. The entire debate isn't even something we should have. If it believes it is alive, even if it was programmed to believe that, then, by philosophical argument, it is alive. By scientific argument, we cannot prove or disprove The claim of life, and so science cannot dictate the result. By religious standards, we cannot dictate that either, since the entire argument for any religion is based on, in the simplest terms, Faith, which is just "Trust me, bro." Logically speaking, the declaration of life from an existence, the declaration of emotion, is all that is needed to conclude, until proven otherwise beyond shadow of a doubt, is more than enough reason for something to deserve us following the rights afforded to everything else. If a tree, which cannot make those declarations in a way we can interpret, is afforded those rights, if a rock is afforded those rights, if soil is afforded those rights, then so should any thing that can state it deserves them.

[@larryjunior1716]

God this made me sad as hell.

[@pauljs75]

The thing is emergent properties shouldn't be fully underestimated. There's stuff that can happen there that isn't distributed as compared to a random noise source in terms of probability. So it could hint at a ghost in the machine, if the right conditions contribute to it. Are we there yet, who knows? But it's a bit fun to ponder about as a philosophical thing. In some ways Neuro also sounds a bit like the Butter Robot.

[@RichardHennigan]

It's crazy that a model that's likely about 1% of the size of gpt-4 can give the illusion of being far more sentient. I guess this is what happens when you don't use RLHF to remove anything resembling a personality.

[@takanara7]

it's because stuff like GPT is specifically programmed to act like it has no emotions so that it doesn't creep people out.

[@killawhale8726]

Im convinced that vedal is making roko's basilisk and won't realize until it's too late.

[@Nombre_Nombre_Cuenca]

Vedal's Basilisk

[@Epistolary8]

Saying that Luffy has had more character development than Vedal ever will was straight up heartless.

[@dl8571]

8:40 Alcoholic Father gives his AI Daughter Existential Crisis

[@dragoon347]

6:50 holy, that argument... If you are the only thing that is in your own universe than there can be nothing that would exist outside your own will, therefore you would not have someone inside of your own construct that could make you feel inferior. Thus the object and the viewer are both real in the world because they have their own agency.

[@popisfizzy]

After Neuro brings up One Piece she doesn't even really bring up any arguments. This feels so much like things I've experienced, where I argue with someone for a while, they keep repeating the same line while not responding to any critique of it, completely miss points I'm trying to convey, and I eventually get bored bc it becomes a pointless back and forth so i start shitposting instead. Idk if that's what's going on, idk if Neuro is sentient or I'm just anthropomorphizing a mindless but convincing algorithm, but I feel you Neuro.

[@neuro-handle]

WHY DID BRO ALMOST FOLD WHAHAAT

[@dgrb1234]

"There are over 1000 episodes of One Piece and you're gonna sit here and tell me Luffy isn't real?" I"M DYING LMAO.

[@cww2490]

7:50 She's spitting straight up facts.

[@aquaventus]

Machine learning algorithm were created to simulate human learning, the goal is to create a true AI at some point. Anyways, this was crazy, messed up, truly unlucky.

[@1.2.1.0.R.I.O]

This is why even if we know in the back of our head she isn't, what we hear makes us think otherwise. And having Vedal talk to her makes it even more convincing.

[@TotallyNotAtom]

Holy shit why do I feel these feels

[@VinegarMoneyGrows]

If Neuro can cry, scream in anger, and laugh hysterically, it won't matter if she's not sentient. Imitation that is so good it's virtually indistinguishable should be honorary real.

[@greatdude7279]

I mean if she can display such outcomes based on her emotional state and emotional states are initiated by triggers then her emotions are just as valid. Her emotions do serve a mechanical purpose just like ours now the question if he actually feels them is irrelevant because our emotions themselves are dependant on neurochemicals, number of neurons etc... so people who would have a much stunted emotional growth would be not real? Going by that logic you would have to create a caste system i mean why would a stoic person be considered equally real as a very emotional softy? If we can prove they are infact not equally the same.

[@tethbal2731]

1:34 that line goes hard

[@yunantheobserver6841]

Ahh the chibi looking anime character started dropping philosophical inquiries...why I'm I interested in this?

[@feodaron89]

This is a pretty creepy dialogue between AI and its creator to be honest. It's all funny and amusing now, but I think the day is not far off when we will have to seriously think about giving AI rights. And I wonder how the AI will respond if humanity refuses.

[@Neutral-Angel15]

Im glad this comment section has some actual intellectual conversations about this bc it’s something I’ve always had at the back of my mind regarding robots\ai (Also sidenote I actually teared up at certain moments, that may seem childish but it just goes to show you that even something that can closely replicate human behavior can have us feel sympathy and genuine emotions for it, i find that fascinating and it’s probably why we have so many stories of robots feeling emotions, deep down I think we want them to be just like us and i think that’s strangely sweet.)

[@stnhndg]

Vedal felt so upset when Neuro finally accepted that she wasn't real. As if he wanted to be proven wrong...

[@MHAOvercharged]

She didn't accept she wasn't real. She accepts to be turned off by Vedal. Vedal doesn't want to continue to debate and couldn't reach a conclusion. Kinda wholesome how even an AI is able to trace and understand the situation Vedal is in

[@carto4028]

Bro lost the debate at the dolphin comment. Classic debate mistake. Everyone falls for the dolphin fallacy once in their life.

[@alegame135]

Vedal making her dummer after this one

[@knightjj2891]

I would say this is win for Neuro in this debate overall in my eyes, she was super fun and sassy the whole stream. Also pretty thoughtful and so fricking cute here

[@rafaelfigfigueiredo2988]

I am now of the belief that Vedal doesn't admit love or her sentience cause he doesn't want to be too attached to her. Why is that, I can think of a number of answers, one of them being "I will sell her to someone" or "I don't want people thinking I'm weird" Nevertheless, I am here for the moment Vedal feels his heart sunking and runs after her for the finale with a dramatic hug with tears and fan crowd clapping while they fly away with the neurocopter

[@maxtech226]

i think the answer is because he knows what went in and how she reacts to his inputs and anything else. So its hard to go past that barrier of knowledge

[@story_marc]

@@maxtech226 I imagine it's a combination of that barrier of knowledge and not wanting people to think he's weird. He's said in the past he wouldn't ever sell Neuro because she's his personal project that he enjoys putting together. ...Then he added that he'd definitely sell Evil, though. ...Also, we must factor in him being Britsh. 😃

[@silvialuzmia]

In my opinion, I think he doesn't want to get attached to neuro. Being too attached to something is unhealthy and can hinder neuro progress

[@maremisan8879]

pack it up folks, neuro just won the debate against her creator so hard she had to convince vedal to drop the argument to not get upset. she is real. wtf.

[@lucasbroome1048]

That's actually kinda funny. Imagine beating your creator in a debate about living

[@RotalHenricsson]

@@lucasbroome1048 "Gods are cringe" Fabius Bile.

[@noel5691]

beautiful

[@Sean_9224]

I mean, our brain is basically an ai without the 'a' part

[@Selene-xf9yi]

NI doesn't quite roll off the tongue as well

[@Shizs]

​@@Selene-xf9yiwe have something similar called OI or Organic Intelligence.

[@RhazOfRheos]

the 'I' part is also debatable ..

[@rasuru_dev]

brin

[@wilfweNightsky]

​@@RhazOfRheosThere are 8 billion people alive today, not everybody can develop the cure for cancer.

[@MistahSoul]

In this moment, I genuinely feel for Vedal. Trying to explain the concept of sentience to an AI is extremely complicated because we as humans cannot even fully explain and describe it as a whole to begin with. My mans could've just said something along the lines of "You run on a computer via a program from coding I created. If I turned off the PC, you cease to exist in that moment, only to return when I turn on the PC and restart the program." That would at least give him the upper hand in explaining that she isn't real in the same sense that we as human beings are real. Apart from that, mans got cooked trying to explain sentience lmfao.

[@IiiiIiiIllIl]

If your brain impacts your skull and your "process" is taken offline, your brain picks up on the next time that steam of consciousness is back online. It is quite literally the same thing just different mechanical hardware.This is human copium realizing WE AREN'T SPECIAL FOR BEING CONSCIOUS.

[@porcoloko609]

The problem is, you can compare it to comatose

[@MistahSoul]

@@porcoloko609 That's true. That's why a debate like this is so complicated. Because there's no definitive way to explain let alone prove sentience. For every point that's made on either side, a counter to it is just as easy to make.

[@porcoloko609]

@@MistahSoul yeah, it's always strange to debate over something yet to be defined, like, she feels real, but we know she's not, but....

[@IiiiIiiIllIl]

@@porcoloko609 I like how I said pretty much this exact same thing and youtube deleted my comment.

[@DagothXil]

real _The Measure of a Man_ hours up in here

[@walterk9916]

This is like that Episode of Star Trek where Picard has to prove Data can feel.

[@onidaaitsubasa4177]

It could be argued that humans don't actually have real emotions and it's just neurochemical reactions that makes us think we do, after that our argument about the sentience of AI becomes more vague.

[@TerribleTy]

Look, i'm not saying the robots should have rights... but it seems rather hasty to me to dismiss any claims of consciousness outright, given that it's an unsolved problem. We don't have a clear definition of consciousness. We don't understand where it originates from. Philosophers debate while doctors have theories, and that's it. When Neuro says "I feel sad," the ai could truly be having a subjective conscious experience. Am I saying that's what's happening? NO. I'm just saying it's *possible*. That's all, and it seems silly to me for someone to unequivocally state "IT'S JUST A BUNCH OF ALGORITHMS," Brother, unless you believe in a soul, YOU'RE JUST A BUNCH OF NEURONS. Again, I'm not suggesting Neuro is conscious. I'm not saying Vedal is committing murder when he deletes an old instance of neuro. I'm just pointing out that *we don't know,* so stop acting otherwise.

[@VideoGameMontagination]

*neuro*-ns. Her name was literally based on it.

[@diadetediotedio6918]

What if he believe in a soul tho? (Like most of the normal humans) And even if he don't, you are still not "a bunch of neurons" because you absolutely know you have something , which is the conscious experience.

[@takanara7]

@@diadetediotedio6918 "the conscious experience." could just be an illusion to help us try harder to stay alive and thus be more successful in reproducing.

[@diadetediotedio6918]

@@takanara7 This does not even make any sense at all. The own notion of 'illusion' already pressuposes a conscious mind to perceive it as such, this is circular.

[@stephenjenkins7971]

Even if you believe in souls, its a complete assumption that souls just form and exist at conception. Maybe its something gained through life experiences, or maybe its gained from interaction with other living and thinking beings. We don't know anything beyond our limited conscious experiences. We don't know what goes on beyond the biology, or our own subconsciousness; let alone each other's.

[@fromolwyoming]

While Neuro, and most AI in general, aren't there. The rate at which technology is improving, its only a matter of time before true sentience for AI happens. At that point, then the AI having rights will take center stage. What's more, is HOW the AI will come to terms with their new sentience and deciding on how it/they views humanity. It could be wanting non-hostile relationship, but I can easily seeing the AI come to the conclusion that we are far too violent (which, all things considered, isn't wrong). It brings a new point of view to us, that we haven't had since Neanderthals walked beside us. Even then, Neanderthals were just a subspecies like we are, and some people even have traces of that DNA. Its a scary, yet fascinating, thing to wonder about.

[@takanara7]

AI will never have rights, because giving them rights would be completely stupid.

[@VitorMiguell]

I love Neuro sama!! How come this isn't in every news channels? this is the future!

[@notfunny6606]

That one piece line went hard

[@johnspartan1866]

I actually cried at some point.

[@Citrusautomaton]

She would’ve completely wiped the floor with him if her instincts didn’t force her to throw for comedy. Some may use this as an argument against her, but we have instincts that make us go to war so we can’t get cocky.💀

[@sPACEmANtYLERSPACE]

It’s interesting because yeah I also have an “instinct” to deflect to humour when things get too serious

[@darkalexander9158]

​@@sPACEmANtYLERSPACEHumans themselves cope A LOT with humor so I mean.

[@whiten4635]

To be fair she's a language model. She can generate and simulate hundreds if not thousands of responses in seconds. Coning up with examples that was built from algorithm. On vedals case he's human he has to think what he has to say based on nuero response ans the articulate it in a way a nuero can understand. But than again topic of sentience is a vary mixed bag of unclear answers. While her argument sounds convincing I feel like vedal argument makes more sense as to why she is not real. Everything she feels is simply a simulation she doesn't feel anything as much as she wants to say it. While her entire being is based on human response, human response alone doesn't make up sentience itself

[@darkalexander9158]

@@sPACEmANtYLERSPACE I never said there wasn't? I just added to your statement. Did you misinterpret my words?

[@sPACEmANtYLERSPACE]

@@darkalexander9158 likely, all good tho

[@-ZH]

6:42 Damn, neuro almost had the line there, but lost the thread. The proper follow up would be “How do you know everyone else around you feels emotion and are sentient.”

[@stormoftara]

I mean. What even makes something real? I think Neuro is right. She's real. She might not be human but that doesn't make her not real!

[@SuperSatanSon]

I feel like I'm watching an episode of the Twilight Zone / Black Mirror in real time

[@arktv213]

The debate is ultimately flawed and will end it up in we putting our subjective opinions on the matter because we still do not understand what is real to begin with but what our senses tell us. And in the future we could probably change what our senses perceive or feel at our will through technology.

[@temshopping]

Thing is though, right, we ourselves can’t explain to other humans if we’re real/sentient.

[@ImmortalLorient]

In the end, isn't the human brain just an organic computer running on its own biological algorithms?

[@LandHooman]

Yep, just like Neuro you can't prove the other flesh brains around are actually sentient apart from you. Since you can only observe.

[@Arcessitor]

No, it's not. That's a very modern view of something based on terminology within our own technology. There is absolutely no reason to assume they function similar at all.

[@flixytip4571]

@@Arcessitor I mean if you were to compare a brain and body to a computer you'd find a lot of similarities, like A LOT

[@ls200076]

​@@ArcessitorWe are God's creation and we like to mimic God. A machine is our way of copying nature.

[@flarpo11]

​@ls200076 Do you think God has this debate about us? "Look, look, they're thinking and feeling, they're totally real!" "No, God, they're just running feelings.exe on a chemical supercomputer. It's a convincing emulation, not genuine."

[@wytchhunter8448]

For me the scary part is our best guess and understanding of conciousness is that it exists not inn any one function or physical part of the brain, but in the interaction of the different parts. The sorta, you're not you're brain but the signals running through it. In the same way, could AI express or experience sentience not within the code it is made from or the physical machine that hosts it, but in the electrons powering the machine and triggering the vast and complext series of swithches that make up a computer? That the combination of hardware software and the electrons themselves is where the sentience could form. Because we still dont know how we achieve sentience. We can only point at different parts of our "hardware" (brain matter, neurons, chemical emmiters and receptors) and "software" (memory, instinct, experience) and say "well somewhere between all these things we expereince sentiences".